, rwanda's support for military financing has been suspended. we will continue to monitor reports of an external support and respond appropriately, including reviewing our assistance. we are working with our partners and the drc to develop a comprehensive approach that addresses all three elements, the congolese defense forces, military justice, and the police. we must work to develop a more professional forces that respect human rights and protect territorial integrity in population. the defense department has provided training to the congolese military, including training of a light infantry battalion in 2010. sexual and gender based violence prevention and training were incorporated in every aspect of this effort. in addition to the ongoing training, the defense department's as included

logistics, exercise participation, basic military intelligence training, humanitarian assistance and he military action. moving forward, the defense department stands ready to work with our colleagues to determine the best way ahead including providing additional infantry training. the scale of need is significant. to date we have trained one battalion with 500 soldiers and military in numbers of approximately 150,000. the capacity for assistance is limited. the congolese defense ministry has been slow to respond to our request for a corporate training and information necessary for congressionally mandated human rights. the lack of english language capacity further and have its training opportunities. while the drc continues to develop its own security capabilities, un peacekeeping

operation remains essential. there is a challenging mandate. we are reviewing options for improving ability to meet civilian protection requirements in the drc. the defense department has supplied military officers to help provide operational efforts to ensure efficient operations. despite many challenges, we have an interest in helping develop a more capable congolese military. hist mr. chairman, ranking member smith, i am grateful for the efforts of congress and this community for continued to shine

a light on this important issue. it is a con and crowded with security challenges. -- a continent crowded with security challenges. thank you for the opportunity to discuss this important issue with you today and i look forward to your questions. >> thank you very much, secretary carson. mr. chairman, ranking member smith, members of the committee, thank you very much for the invitation to testify today on the crisis unfolding in the eastern democratic republic of the condo, also referred to as the drc. the security and humanitarian situation of the drc is the most volatile and pilots in

africa today. an estimated 5 million people have lost their lives since 1998 and millions more have been uprooted in its place. the current crisis is simply the latest iteration. the rapid fall of goma last month to the condoleezza rebel group known as the m23 provided a stark reminder -- to the condoleezza rebel group. -- congolese rebel group. at the highest levels of united states government, we are committed to helping the drc and its neighbors in this cycle of

violence and instability so we do not find ourselves back -- so that we do not find ourselves in another three years with another crisis in the vrsc. the secretary clinton, ambassador riesch, undersecretary for political affairs and ambassador windy sherman high and -- and i have all met with an spoken with the rwandan and rwanda and officials in the past few weeks for a rapid and peaceful resolution to the crisis. i have travelled to the region just last month with my british and french counterparts to press the condoleezza, rwanda in, and ugandan governments to work together and start the crisis and address the causes of instability.

and all three governments reiterated to us their shared goals -- their share gold -- shared goals. all three indicated to was that the most abusive commanders are now under targeted sanctions and we have placed those same individuals under u.s. sanctions. talks between the garcia government and the environment -- m 23 began on december 29 in uganda and are being mediated with uganda as the chair on the international conference of the great lakes region known as the i c g lra. as the two sides begin substantive con -- talks, the current cease-fire is holding and the parties continue to express commitment to a

dialogue. much of the m-23's military success and prowess and would not have been possible without outside support. there's a credit to ballpark -- body of evidence that corroborates the assertions of the u.n. experts that the rwanda government provided significant military and political support to the end-23. while there is evidence of uganda providing support to and- 23, we do not have a body of evidence suggesting that the ugandan government as a policy supported the m-23. nonetheless, we sit and -- we continue to urge, ugandan officials that -- to make sure that supplies do not originate or travel through that territory. and we have not limited our response to diplomacy alone.

as required by the fiscal year 2012 appropriations act, secretary clinton suspended foreign military financing for fmf and rwanda for 2012 because of its support to m 23. the department continues to closely monitor support -- reports of ekstrand support and will continue to respond -- but an external support and will continue to respond appropriately should develop. the highest levels of the u.s. garment are committed to helping the vrsc and the region's -- helping the prc and the region achieve sustainable peace.

we spoke yesterday with president could army and underscored any effort -- underscored the importance of not supporting any effort that could undermine peace. abiding by the recent indications that he made in campala along with other leaders and in reaching a transparent end -- and credible political agreement ending 23 serious human rights abuses. president obama believes that from this crisis should a merger political agreement that addresses the underlying regional security and economic and government issues while

upholding the territorial integrity. the ferc must take concrete steps toward reform -- the drc must take steps toward reform to reach lasting peace in the drc. looking forward, we are using all the tools at our disposal to help address and end this crisis. we are monitoring humanitarian needs and working to mobilize resources to ensure continued emergency assistance to civilians in need. we are calling upon everyone involved in the conflict to maintain the current cease- fire, to permit humanitarian access and to pursue a sustainable political resolution through honest and

meaningful dialogue. while the talks between the and 23 and the -- the m23 anti- drc must continue -- and the drc must continue, resolving the conflict is paramount in the region. some of the root causes can only be dealt with in a one-on-one dialogue. these include refugee resettlement, the illegal exploitation of natural resources, border security, and support networks for armed groups. while the responsibility to implement change press first and foremost with the governments of the region -- rests first and foremost with the government of the region, we encourage the united nations

secretary-general to appoint a high-level envoy to engage the countries on a sustainable -- to engage in the countries on a sustainable basis and help them achieve these resolutions over the long term. throughout this peace building process, civilian protection is and must remain a priority. the u.n. peacekeeping mission in the drc has come under very heavy scrutiny in recent weeks. while we believe minister goes performance -- performance has been acceptable under difficult circumstances, there's always room for improvement. we are reviewing the proposals on the table to improve and

capacity tominusco's protect civilian and encounter arm gricar -- armed groups. in the meantime, we remain committed to supporting minusco's robust implementation of its current mandate. the prime responsibility for protecting the drc and the condoleezza people rests with -- the congolese people rest with the drc. the crisis of the last few months has illustrated the critical need for a capable comgolese army to protect the citizens. and to reach sustainable peace, the drc must accelerate its

efforts toward the securities sector reform. we have and will continue to work with the government to professionalize the military, including continuing our training to army officers and support to the armed forces military justice capacities. along with military reform, the vrsc government must expand government's -- governments across the country. the government across the country has allowed armed units set up parallel administrations and explored the population. government efforts must include electoral reform, holding a long delayed provincial and local elections, and strengthening state institutions to provide much needed public services. we believe the time has come for the drc and the international

community to permanently break the cycle of violence and impunity that exists in the region. today's crisis is a deep tragedy. but it also offers an opportunity to help the drc and the regent -- the region to set itself on its path toward peace and prosperity. we encouraged them to achieve the goals that we all seek. thank you, mr. chairman. >> thank you very much. secretary, please describe the strategic defense priorities within africa and how does the situation in the drc situation

with these priorities? >> thanks for the question. a person and foremost, the prairie recently has been on counterterrorism issues. -- first and foremost, the priority recently has been on counter-terrorism issues. can you hear me now? the top priority has always been the defense of the people. we have been acutely focused on defense issues. most importantly in north africa where they have gotten the most attention. we are also keenly interested in the overall security as it leads into the atrocities prevention concerns that we have. the great lakes region, liberal history of that region is something that we -- the brutal history of the region is something that we are all aware of. we're focusing the defense of our efforts on improving capacity, defense, to ensure that hardships can be alleviated and we can prevent

atrocities. the bulk of our efforts has been on counter-terrorism as well as building partnership capacity to fight that mission as well as the address humanitarian needs as well. >> secretary carson, my understanding is that the state department managed an effort toown as tripartite plus address the issues in the region. my understanding is that the state department's top the severed in 2009. can you explain why the department of state is no longer pursuing a separate and what has taken its place? >> thank you for the question. prior to 2009, there was in existence an effort called the tripartite plus. when the obama administration

came into office in 2009, we contacted the leaders of the four key states in uganda, rwanda, drc and burundi to ask those leaders whether they were interested in carrying on with the tripartite plus arrangement. there was no consensus among the states to do so. and in fact, rwanda did not want to carry on the process. we did not, in fact, per -- attempt to pursue it we found there was division among the four countries. however, to maintain our high level of interest, secretary clinton appointed to a special adviser for the great lakes. the great --

the late howard wolpi, from the state of michigan for many years and who served as the special envoy for the first two years of the obama administration. he passed away. he was replaced by barry luckily, an experienced diplomat who would serve indeed drc and -- in the drc and has served in a number of posts. the decision to stop tripartite plus was based on a reluctance of all the governments in the region to carry on. >> thank you. mr. smith? >> secretary carson, rwanda has increasingly been getting a --

attention as a major source of a problem in the region. and there's a lot of history here, going back and forth across the border of atrocities committed on both sides, of congolese genser wanda and vice versa. rwanda has cleared desires to protect their border. but -- i think we're going to need as a country to put more pressure on rwanda to change their behavior. they are not the only part of the problem. there are a ton of gangs involved. what do you see going forward izod their interest in that -- as their interest in that region? on the one hand, it seems the m23 is just driving up more instability.

i think both of you mentioned in your remarks the minerals that are so important in that region. there are a lot of people that are making a lot of money despite the chaos. they have figured out what they ought to do to work with whatever warm boards they have to work with to get the stuff out. what is rwanda's thinking and how we know -- how can we move them more toward stability? they're not even being honest about what they are doing in the region. how can we improve the situation?

>> there are several reasons for their obvious engagement in the region. the first is the rwanda military to continue to exist in the eastern part of the country, the fdlr as they are called. the members of the rwandan army who participated in the genocide in 1994. rwanda's desire is to see all of these individuals taken off the battlefield, brought to justice. part of their actions are motivated by security and the desire to see fdlr completely eliminated. the second desire is to ensure that all of the tutsi speakers in the region who crossed the border between you got the cumberland bay, uganda --

between rwanda, burundi, you got up, and the drc are not subject to intimidation and human rights violations -- uganda and drc are not subject to intimidation and human rights violation. and they would like to see the issues of refugee resettlement and taken care of. there continue to exist a large number largecongolese in refugee -- a large number of comgolese in refugee camps that should be allowed to go back to the east. all of these motivate their interests in the area. >> thank you. i have one more question, but i see we have been joined by congresswoman abbas. i would like to ask unanimous

consent that non-committee members be able to participate in the hearing today. >> no objections. so ordered. >> a question on the other side of it is whatever role rwanda may be playing on the other side with the drc is the main part of a problem, that they cannot provide security in that region. you mentioned the need to train battalion's their and legislative requirements in terms of human-rights that need to be met -- the need to meet certain standards. can you talk about what they need to do to meet those standards and how problematic the government is in getting to a solution to this problem? >> you are right, the human rights concerns are huge in the , which is one of the reasons

we have an interest in training them. the one battalion that we have trained, we have seen that it is relatively successful and that battalion has not shown much evidence of human rights abuses, or the kinds of things that we are concerned about when thinking of the congolese military. we are engaging the military there cannot terms of what needs to proceed to do that. if there needs to be a signature that would perhaps allow us to move forward in the future. >> are going to get that signed, you think? will that work? >> we will see. it is on us to work congolese

colleagues to -- >> get the drc to agree. >> absolutely. but this would do much to address the right to a abuse problems. >> thank you. >> at the outset of today, you mention this was the last hearing that we would have this year un the ranking member are always very gracious at thanking the members of this committee and witnesses for the great job that they do, but we want to thank both of you for your hard work. this is still probably the most bipartisan committee in congress. we appreciate your efforts toward that. i support when you do and i do not want to have you misinterpret my question, but it is one that we have to ask. as we have had cuts to national defense, and especially to the department of the defense, someone argue $487 billion and others would say it is much more

than that. when you look at the dollars that we are spending in rwanda and the drc, can you give us a ballpark of the resource dollars that the department of state is spending there? are those dollars adequate? and how would you prioritize that in terms of some of the other cuts that you see coming down and how we justify that and explain that -- how do we justify that and explain that? >> it is a great question as you know, secretary panetta is seized with the issue of sequestration and a possible affect it will have on our military and national security generally. we are focused on all the issues that we confront in the apartment. you asked -- in the department. you asked about a total number. i would like to add all of that to come back to you to give you an -- an accurate answer. in the grand scheme, it is a relatively modest expenditure in

terms of the overall spending. we are prioritizing the areas in terms of the securities sector reform, a particularly in the condo. -- congo. we can help to lift the military up and get closer to the standards that we think would solve the problems. i want to stress that it is still a relatively modest investment of our time and we are able to get a fairly large return on our investment in terms of the output. it is no secret that if we were to seek further defense cuts we would have to take a close look at all of these efforts. even as modest as the current expenditures are. >> i will not try to catch you off guard today, but give us -- give that some thought and get back to was on the record on that. pull together as best you can the dollars on that.

but also whether they are adequate and if we are putting the right dollars in. and it was a prioritization because at some point we've got to look at all of that in the grand scheme of things. we appreciate your opinion on that. >> absolutely. >> mr. mcintyre. >> i would like to ask a panel what you feel like with regard to am-23 in -- m23 with regard to their ultimate aims, do you feel the threat is subsiding you feel there is a threat of war? >> i will take that question. the m23 is a rebel group that once integrated into the

congolese military and has now broken away because they believe the terms that were signed on their integration into the military on march 23, 2009, were broken. what we are seeing in the aredrc is a rebel -- in the eastern drc is a rebel group that has defied its military command. they have been referred -- they have refused to be located out of the eastern region as units and they refuse to be relocated out by separate senior officers. this is at the heart of the current rebellion. but the orangemen -- origin of the m23 is that it was a rebel group prior to 2009. it went under a different akron

and then, d cndp, but is basically a rebel group. the military leaders have sought to parlay their influence into political influence. >> do you believe their activities will lead to some kind of regional wardak and how serious are their continuing activities? >> -- regional war? and how serious are their continuing activities? >> that is the concern. it has growing capability and has shown in recent months to be a match, if not superior, of the congolese says. the continued activity and the support that they get is something -- that is why we are concerned. if this continues much longer, there is a fear that this could spark a deeper war. along the lines that congo has seen too much of in the last 20 years.

>> thank you. mr. lamb born. mr. kaufman. >> thank you, mr. chairman. what is the estimate is strength in terms of active participants in m23? either one of you? >> roughly 1000. >> roughly 1000. and can you go over again -- a think you mentioned that the support is coming from rwanda, you believe. and if so, why is rwanda supporting m23? or why you think they are supporting m23? >> as secretary carson has outlined, there is credible body of evidence that rwanda is supporting m23. it is part of the conversation

that the president had yesterday with the rwandan president. one of the reasons their support their goes to the origin of the what the president has outlined as far as the people there seen themselves as the guardians of the tutsis to the east. they feel the m23 can help protect the tutsis to the east. >> what is the strength of the army? >> they are roughly 123,000 total. but pago is roughly the size of western europe. there are about 6000 deployed. no, that is the minusco, 6000 deployed in the east purdum i do not know the exact number of the congolese military in the east

because it is a vast amount of area they are trying to cover with military troops. >> why is this such a big issue for the drc in order to be able to basically prevail in this situation? >> a slight provision -- revision. i think probably today, the m23 probably has up to 2000 troops. the sign -- i think he has pointed out the size of the congo, but i think it is important to graphically described the congo as a country that is as large as the eastern part of the united states from the atlantic to the mississippi. it is an enormous country, and since the split of sudan, it is

geographically the largest in africa. the eastern congo is one of the most of a cold areas in which to operate -- one of the most difficult areas in which to operate. it is deeply for arrested in some places. and in -- is deeply forested. in some cases, a double and triple canopies. some areas have volcanoes, some of which are active. and it sits in what is called the western rift valley, which gives it both altitude and low- level dump at the same time. it is an area that is very difficult terrain-wise to operate in. in terms of the estimation of the no. 0 soldiers in the --

the number of the drc soldiers in the eastern congo is somewhere around 120,000 stretching from north to south, and also the ituri. they are faced with not only the rebels of the m23, but half a dozen to a dozen other or smaller rebel groups operating in the area, including the fdlr, which is an anti-rwandan group, which is of concern in kigali. but there are probably seven or eight different groups that go under the name might-might that has a third our current and

currentmy-mt -- that go under the thatmi-mi that has and another third acronym as well. >> thank you. ms. davis. >> thank you for being with us this morning. it is important and we are here discussing these issues. talking about security and the abuse of human rights in the drc. i appreciate the effort. as we -- as you stated, the violence in this part of the world is a threat to human rights across the globe. such injustice is always are. we have to recognize the reality there. can you speak to successes or setbacks in the efforts to

professionalize the military forces in the drc with regard to the effectiveness of those forces and combating sexual violence against women and children? to an extent that our efforts have been successful in this endeavor, how can we support those efforts and to the extent that we have seen marked improvement, you mentioned earlier the discipline and impunity persist. what should we be doing to address it? >> thank you. as i said in my statement, the sexual violence and preventing that is a huge priority for all of our programming in this part of the world. iran the world, but particularly in this part -- a round of the world, but particularly in this part of the world. in this specific battalion that we have trained we have seen a successful effort in terms of the human rights abuses, a lack of human rights abuses coming

out of that group compared to the rest of the military there. >> into what do you attribute that? >> it is the training effort. is the education, this plan -- the discipline. congolese military is riddled with problems, but just the simple training and discipline and has made a difference. we have ongoing efforts on the rule of law and military justice. we spend millions of dollars to work with the military during a wholesale way on mentor ship and to make sure that human rock -- human rights and the law are instilled drought. -- instill that throughout. >> and where you have seen

efforts not working at all, where is it? is it the same? >> again, the challenges are paramount. these are forces that do not howff a great amount of discipline. they do not have great training. enda in many cases, they do not have great education. there is a capacity problem within the drc, and it makes it harder to try to train them up in a way that meets the standards that we would like to see in the military. >> would you like to comment further? gregg's yes, i would. -- >> yes, i would. i would like to say that security sector reform in the army has been a failure, for the most part. it is a failure because of all of things that my colleague has said, but is also a failure because of the elements appear

of corruption. soldiers are not paid on a regular basis. they are not sustained and read what in the field -- and reequipped in the field. they do not have sustainable housing for their families. many times, when they are sent out there basically forgotten. -- they are basically forgotten. one of the reasons our first battalion has been successful is because we put down a number of very clear conditions on the government of the drc to ensure that this battalion would be effective. we said to the government, they must be maintained as a cohesive unit. they cannot be broken apart and sent to different units.

they must be paid on a regular basis. and we even talked directly, and i must say, i spoke with the president there and members of his government about this, introducing mobile banking to ensure that soldiers would be able to get their pay as long as they had a cell phone. this is starting to take place. we also said they must be properly housed and they must be supported with resupplied. and additionally, we also assigned a couple of mentors to work with them after their training to make sure that they would retain their cohesiveness

and their sharpness. and they were very good. the counter lra operations -- and they were part of the counter lra operations in the north of the country for a long time. >> mr. scott. >> thank you. i am at robins air force base. i would like to talk to you about the security in the democratic-democratic republic of congo and the accused -- and the humanitarian mission and the military mission. can you speak to what is being done now with the isi our platforms? >> as you are very well aware, the i s r issue is incredibly important to us and there is huge value in everything we are doing.

with regard to the eastern congo, there is not much isr that we are providing. the military assistance is the support and the train and mentor should that we are talking about. when it comes to the clra mission, that is something that we are helping to contribute to as we are working with the ugandan military on the clra mission. >> we do have the ability through our platforms to show the trucks of where the rebel units are moving and i think that is important both from a humanitarian mission as well as a military mission. mr. carson, you said we will have to permanently break this cycle. you used the word eliminated with regard to the fdlr. certainly, what has gone on in

africa with the human rights abuses, very few things in the world have reached the level of abuses that have been occurring there for years. my concern with the way we try to handle these things with the state department is that we are always playing defense. if it is going to be up to these organizations like the fdlr end m23 to break the cycle, up one. are going to help the democratic republic of pago against these groups? >> as i said in my testimony, the responsibility for resolving the problems in the great lakes are principally responsibility of the presidents and leaders in their respective

countries. we have to engage amarah -- diplomatically with them to realize that instability, violence, continued refugee flows and impunity are not in the interest of any of these states. it requires political will on their part and the desire to recognize peace within their own borders as well as those that need for them. we will continue diplomatic efforts. we will also help to train the condoleezza -- congolese battalions. we are committed to training a second battalion if the government various provided -- is prepared to sign an m.o. you with respect to how this battalion will be maintained.

>> i am close to out of time. the 391st, how many men they -- make up that italian and however well-equipped our day? >> -- make up the that the italian and how well equipped are they? >> approximately 6000 and they been maintained appropriately. >> again, i apologize for interrupting you, but if we're going to break the cycle, i do not understand how diplomacy works with somebody that has made a living out of raping and murdering other human beings. i do not think it needs to be the u.s. military that does this, but i do believe that doisr platforms -- our isr platforms could be an asset to the people trying to get rid of those who are

committing murder and rape over there. as we train another battalion and make our isr platform available to take those out who will, quite honestly, not stopped the gravy in murdering people until they are eliminated. >> ambassador carson, the first question has to do with you and it has to do with training and equipping the state department with the several tools available to them. a number of years at about, -- a number of years back, a goal was created for challenges like this that we see in the drc. do you expect to see a contingency fund proposal for the drc in the future? >> that is under review and it

is quite possible that you will see one. we are, as i say, looking at the prospects of trying to train a second battalion in the prc -- drc, provided the government is willing to commit to a number of changes for the effectiveness of those that might be changed -- train. >> do you have a source of money for those in the battalion? >> yes. >> what was the source? >> i think it was the pkro. those from't you use a global security? greta i think it was what we had

available. -- >> i think it was what we had available. there is enormous demand for all that is appropriated for africa, for the cota monies as well as the pko monies. much of what we have done in the last several years has been to support what has turned out to be a successful effort in somalia to eliminate al qaeda of representatives, al-shabab, there. -- eliminate al qaeda representatives al-shabab there. >> what would be an mou for the second italian debt would not -- that would be different from what was there for the first battalion? are things missing? have other things been developed? what were those things? >> what we said to the drc

government is that we want you to sign an mou with the united nations to prevent the recruitment and retention of child soldiers in your entire military, not just in the italians, but the entire military. -- in the battalions, but in the entire military. they have now done that. we also set as a part of this mou that there must be a complete leahy vetting of all lovey -- all of the participants. >> and that would be with a focus on human rights? gregg's exactly. -- >> exactly. and we also said you must keep them as a composite unit. you must equip them and keep them and paid -- you must pay them regularly.

those are the things that we demanded the first time round and are insisting on them this time. we have expanded out because we are insisting that they signed an action plan with the government to deal with child soldiers retention and recruitment. >> those two issues would be different than the first mou. >> exactly. >> what is the logistics capability for the first battalion and what do you expect the logistics capability for the second battalion as well? is it just for u.n. peacekeeping, for the u.s.? >> it is farrakhan -- fardic. it is the government that is moving these people around the country providing equipment and

supplies. >> do you have any separate answers to these questions? >> know, the ambassador has converted quite well. >> thank you for being here. we are talking about an area of operations here in the drc, but i think we need to look at a bigger area of interest. when we talk about the region, we talk about the m23, but what are the other non-state belligerence that we have to contend with in the region? >> there are probably a dozen. i do not have a list. but i will give you one and make sure that you do have it. there is the fdlr, which is comprised of former rwandan

soldiers who participated in the genocide. we know there is a group of insurgents called indian -- called up african democratic liberation front, who are anti- uganda, and anti- president mosevini and they have operated across the border. the m23 and its predecessor was something called the cndp, which was a rebel group. there are at least 10 rebel groups that start off with the name mai mai. they are ethnic communities. the >> it is a multifaceted, mostly travel based, would you

say? >> -- mostly tribal base, would you say? >> yes, it is regional. really quickly, adf, which i mentioned. there is a adf you gone in group. there is fdlr, which carried out genocide in rwanda. there is another dealing with conflict minister -- minerals. there is the m23. there is the mai mai sheka. >> let me get to my point. my time is running out. as i listened to the two of you as you spoke, you talk about sustainable fees and -- sustainable peace and foreign

and defense missions. what exactly are you looking at getting done? if you talk about foreign internal defense, do we have the capability with our capabilities there to do this? as a measure put american soldiers into a precision, -- as soon as you put american soldiers into position, i got to tell you that in vietnam, afghanistan, and somalia, we did not do so well initially. what are we going to do as far as strategic and operational posturing? do we have the capability and capacity to do that? do we need to go to coalition partners britain and france? where is the potential for mission creep and escalation? which is exactly what we house

-- what we saw happen in somalia and it dovetailed off over mogadishu. and i do not think you mentioned to the warlords, did you? gregg's warlords are not here. of taking care of these problems. >> that is foreign internal defense. >> right now we have three personnel who are part of the monusco mission. when we had the training effort underway for the 391st, it was about 60 folks. there are now out. it is a limited footprint. about 17,000 u.n. troops in the congo.

>> all of these different non state, non uniform belligerents coming together against our efforts, is there a potential there? >> no. i would like to underscore what has been said. we're not talking about american soldiers on the ground, engaged against rebel groups in the drc. that is not something that is in our game plan or in our thinking. what we need to focus on -- >> train and enable? >> to train and unable, build capacity. >> build capacity, an able and trained. -- enable, and train. >> the continent of africa is the richest in the world in

terms of minerals and natural resources. this continent of africa is the source of 90% of the precious minerals, gemstones, and strategic materials used by the industrialized nations of the world. yet, the people on the continent of africa are the poorest of the poor. i am pretty sure i would get no disagreement from either one of you on that point. another point i would like to make is that over the recent centuries, dictators and corrupt leaders of failed african states have cut deals

with multinationals from the developed world. these deals generally pay meager royalties for the raw materials that are extracted from the land. part of the money goes into the swiss bank accounts of the corrupt leaders. the money never trickles down to development within the country. it is the multinationals that exploit the raw materials out of africa to places where they can be developed, and in that development process, it means that the people who live in the places where the goods are being refined are able to get jobs, and then they are able to have some prosperity throughout

the land. but that does not take place in africa. then you have the issue of the debt that is extended, or monies better extended to these african countries for development, and then the debt is unpaid and forgiven, which permanently locks in poverty because the resources that are available that are not going into the swiss bank accounts have to go to be paid -- have to go to repay the debt. and then in the drc, we have the same kind of abject poverty, hunger, starvation, disease, lack of basic social services.

despite the fact that -- i will quote from our memo. it says, "economic growth has been strong in recent years," -- speaking of the drc -- "reaching an estimated 6.9% in 2011." the drc receives high levels of donor aid, with over $5.90 billion being disbursed in 2010. what i would like to know, what part does the economic exploitation of africa and its natural resources play in the support of these courses that are throughout the drc? you mentioned the m23 and others.

what impact does the quest for the natural resources of africa have to play on the support of those groups? >> let me say thank you very much for the question. there is no question that conflict minerals contribute to sustaining conflicts in africa. groups are able to take control of mineral rich areas and then to smuggle those minerals out through neighboring states into the international market. it does play a role in sustaining these kinds of conflicts. this is why legislation passed her by the congress has been

useful in putting a check and a control over what u.s. companies can buy in places like the democratic republic of the congo. >> the gentleman's time has expired. if you can finish that out for the record, please. >> thank you, mr. chairman. good one of you tell me how much the united states of america is spending on the congo now, both military and nonmilitary aid? >> the total assistance package to the democratic republic of the congo is running approximately $480 million.

that is the total package that includes both the military and economic and humanitarian assistance that we provide to the country. >> does united states of america have a national security interest in the congo? if so, what is it? >> who do have interests there. >> a national security interest? >> we have an interest in helping to do as much as we can to maintain the stability. that can have a direct impact on the united states. the largest single u.n. peacekeeping program in the world is in the democratic republic of the congo. we spend and appropriate some 25% to 26% of what is authorized by the un for this

program. it consumes an enormous amount of time. we have to respond to humanitarian crises, in the region -- >> mr. carson, we have limited time. it seems to me that the interest you have described would mean that the united states of america has a national security interest in every place in the world. i noticed you focused on the word interest as opposed to national security interest in your answer to me. i have reservations about united states of america continuing to be the world's

police. mr. chairman, we know the impact of president obama's sequestration policy that congress unfortunately approved in august of 2011 and with the adverse affect on our uniformed personnel being numbers of less than or equal to that of immediately before world war ii. the number of naval vessels being reduced or cut to naval operational size of world war i era. the air force having the smallest number of operational aircraft in the history of united states of airforce. that is what the are looking at, because of president obama sequestration policy. everyone here in washington is involved in this attack on our national defense capabilities from a financial perspective. the united states of america has limited funding. i would strongly urge us to use

the $480 million being spent on the congo, instead being used to help to people in united states of america who are in need of help, or help reduce the deficit that was testified to be the greatest national security threat to the united states of america. it is a matter of priorities. i appreciate the very noble -- i emphasize the word noble -- effort to help people who are in harm's also way in various parts of the world. my colleague from florida mentioned somalia. certainly in vietnam we tried to do the noble things. we're in a different financial reality. in the absence of a national

security interest in the congo, i am afraid that sequestration will force us to retract even though we may wish to the contrary. i yield back the remainder of my time. >> a couple of questions. sequestration is not only obama's, but also our responsibility. i believe we voted for it. >> i did not vote for it. >> we talked about this whole issue. it has been suggested that perhaps -- >> $80 million. is that more or less correct?

[indiscernible] >> we will hear that in a few moments. if that is correct, i would point out that this really is a national security issue for america because de-stabilization of africa provides a direct opportunity for al-qaeda and related terrorist organizations. is that the situation in africa today? >> certainly to up the continent, that is a concern. this region we're focused on, we have not seen that concern yet. >> beyond this region into roby on this region. >> clips make it clear that africa is a security issue for united states. is that correct? >> there is no question that where we have seen a prolonged instability -- >> yes or no.

we are going to vote for an $88 billion appropriation of the national defense authorization for afghanistan. that must assume the full contingent of american troops in afghanistan for the entire year 2013 budget. given the amount of money that is presently available to deal with the military situations in africa, this committee might consider how we allocate american resources. i'll put that on the table. -set of questions deals with the issue up -- ambassador carson, you wrote that the underlying issues of illegal exploitation of natural resources is one of the major problems in this region.

is that the case? >> yes. >> would you consider the ivory trade to be an exploitation of natural resources of africa? >> de absolutely. >> do you have any indication that the ivory trade is supporting the m23 in the congo? >> i do not know, but i can find out what we have on that and get back to you. >> i will share with you that the international environmental and wildlife community believe the answer is yes. of what resources are we presently putting into the effort to understand the illegal ivory trade and its connection to not only the congo, but other destabilizing forces in africa? >> approximately one month ago,

secretary clinton posted at the department of state a meeting between major african countries that have large wildlife populations, and also a large number of countries in asia that are believed to be the purchasers and recipients of illegal ivory. it was an effort to indicate our great concern. into putting more money trying to beef up anti poaching operations -- anti-poaching operations, and get the demand reduced in asia. >> and the military side of it? >> i will have to get back to you. >> you should be aware. by all the evidence presented, it is a major element in the

destabilization and support of rebel groups, many of whom are clearly aligned with al qaeda. >> the gentleman's time has expired. >> have you worked with the guys who have been training as our troops in afghanistan? when you speak about the congolese that are unmotivated, illiterate, all those words have been used to describe the afghan military and afghan forces. i would hope there is crossover. all the lessons learned in the billions of dollars spent in afghanistan, i hope they are transferring their knowledge to you.

is there a crossover? >> absolutely. we've learned a lot of lessons over the years. it is being applied across our military. >> specifically people from afghanistan, lessons learned, tactics, techniques and procedures from afghanistan, putting in place specific procedures? clucks general doctrine has influenced. i will have to get back to you as to the specific individuals. -- procedures? >> general doctrine has been influenced. i will get back to you as to the success of individuals. >> do you have any lower flying isr systems or platforms right now? >> in this region? >> yes. >> no. >> would region is that going to?

>> -- what region is that going into? >> it is not the eastern congo. >> and then how is that going to help you? >> it is a separate mission. >> do you have the flexibility to use it in both places? >> we're planning to use that against a clra mission. in terms of using that for another mission, that is not in our plans right now. >> there is not a military person your that can answer

this better, but are you expecting any capability gaps in the isr we have been using in the middle east and southwest asia. you're talking about triple canopy jungle versus desert and mountainous regions. i am curious to see if we have any capability gaps because we have not been looking at isr in that environment. >> you are absolutely right. the terrain there presents specific challenges and unique challenges in terms of isr. i can get back to you. >> i would hope that you would capture that for us and give it to us, because there's probably not a whole lot of people

looking at how the platforms we have now, weapons systems we have now, work in that type of an environment. we have not had to be in that kind of an environment. i would hope that you can capture that, put down some kind of requirements. if you're in a triple canopy jungle, does the stuff that we have actually work? >> will definitely follow up with you on that. >> think you, mr. chairman. >> can i have an estiamte from each of you as to how many rapes occur in the drc each year? >> i will get back to you on the precise number. it is probably a higher level than anyplace else in africa, and certainly may be the highest in the world. we do have an estimate, but i would like to give you a

precise answer. some have described it as the rape capital of the world. the number is extraordinary. >> easily hundreds of thousands. they are taking place by members of the m23, is that safe to say? >> yes. it is taking place by all of the rebel groups. >> an article in the "new york times" referenced the rape capital of the world comment, and he asked the question, what strategic purpose is there of putting an ak-47 assault rifle inside a woman and pulling the trigger or cutting out a woman's fetus and making her

friends eat it? the government's response has been a shrug. that is diabolical. and yet, we are funding on a yearly basis $480 million into this country that allows this horrendous abuse to go on. it appears we do it with full knowledge of the extent of these rapes, and we're not holding them accountable. it is like giving an addict more dope. how do we justify it? >> the funding the defense

department is providing is for the training and education that would instill discipline to prevent this very kind of horrific behavior. it is absolutely unacceptable. the funding but supported for specific programming to prevent this from happening from the congolese military. the rebel groups, that is another problem. there is outrageous and unacceptable things happening. our programs are aimed to ensure that does not happen. >> we ask that there be no immunity. secretary clinton traveled in the eastern congo to see the president.

this was one of the major ones on her mind. she demanded and asked for the arrest. the troops had been engaged. he asked for these to be incarcerated or removed. >> we have been arrested.

>> i have one question. i would be very interested with respect to what he asked about lessons learned. it if you could provide that for the record i would appreciate it. my question to you is about all

the other programs. it does not seem like the money is going in through other arenas trying to put in a justice system. if this is being, if we are seeing troops coming across to aid are being part of this, what if any of the programs are

in the country? i have been in some of these areas. the horn of africa. i have not been to the congo. in most other area i have been there. mine would be security. are we training their? paint a picture for me of what it looks like. are we doing anything about it? look at what is going on. >> border security in the region is almost nonexistent. there is very little security along the borders.

people move along. they are not delineated for the populations. >> are the mountainous? >> they are. >> it is time to look at this typography map. >> is there some idea of maybe putting some efforts to fourth? how do you do this? >> it is an enormous challenge. there is the size of the country. this country shares borders with nine other countries.

geographically this is large of the united states and is large as all of western europe. >> the congo river divides it from the republic of the congo. there are lakes that divide the country between its eastern neighbors and the congo. >> i would be interested in the delineation of money. the big question as to why are

we not helping them with border security? that is one of the things we have found in iraq that we need to put into to ensure that bad guys are not going from one country to another. some comments to this committee specifically about how we handle some of that. >> absolutely. >> thank you. thank you for letting me in on today's hearing. i had a couple of questions. you are responding. you were talking about the commanders asked to be arrested. >> i will give you a status report. this was back in 2009. we track to these.

several were arrested. i will get back and give you a status report on that. beyond that, there are some of the things that my colleagues and we have put a lot of effort in trying to get them to introduce the problems within their own governments and with and the military. we have strengthened the military judicial system. we have called for this.

we have increased the number of military police officers. >> you mentioned the other rebel groups. when we had a hearing last week, i do not remember that coming up. i wanted to know if you can talk about what the numbers are. if they are anti-drc, what is their basis? >> i keep give you a listing with a very rough approximations of the numbers. i will pass that on to you. many of these groups have no affiliations. there are groups that are both self protecting and they are groups that are brought protecting communities.

>> are they more like gangs? >> they are self sustaining. they are living in communities to exploit them. they are protecting and doing things the government would do if it were capable. >> thank you. >> that concludes our questions. thank you. the committee will adjourn for a few minutes while we switched the panelists. thank you very much. the >> tonight, interviews with retiring members of congress. first, dan burton has been a member of the u.s. house for 30 years. and then north dakota democrat kent conrad that is leaving the

senate after five terms. we spoke with them about how things have changed on capitol hill since they were elected. and join us tonight at 8:00 p.m. eastern on c-span. on tomorrow morning's washington journal, we ask business owners to call and and ask about the fiscal cliff. and we talked to the chief economist, lawrence yun. and discussions about the fiscal cliff negotiations as congress returns to washington. and later, a discussion on background checks, how they work, and when they are required. washington journal is live at 7:00 a.m. eastern on c-span.

columnist in a news analyst talks about the relationship with religion and american politics. he was introduced by the former missouri senator and ambassador to the united nations and john danforth. from washington university, this is an hour-and-a-half. >> finally, it is my honor to introduce senator john danforth, who will introduce mr. will. the senator is a partner with the law firm. he graduated with honors from princeton university, where he majored in religion. he received a bachelor of divinity degree from yale divinity school and a bachelor of laws degree from yale law school. he practiced law for some years and began his political career in 1968 when he was elected attorney general of missouri in his first place for public office.

missouri voters elected him to the u.s. senate in 1976. they reelected him in 1982 and 1988, for a total of 18 years of service. the senator initiated major legislation in international trade, telecommunications, health care, research and development, transportation, and civil rights. he was later appointed special counsel by janet reno. he later represented the united states as u.s. ambassador to the united nations and served as a special envoy to sudan. he has been a great friend to missouri, st. louis, and

washington university. please join me in welcoming him now. [applause] >> thank you. thank you very much. i owe our speaker an apology. when you hear the apology, you are going to conclude that i am a really terrible human being. i am the kind of person who takes advantage of a friend, especially a friend who is vulnerable. when he is vulnerable, i pounce. tonight's origin was a rehearsal dinner the night before the wedding of victoria will, george's only daughter.

george was standing on the edge of the hotel ballroom taking and one of life's great moments. the marriage of the daughter is so deeply emotional. george the loving father was clearly caught up in a moment. that was the moment i seized the opportunity to strike. i sidled up to him and whispered ever so softly in his ear, would you mind giving a lecture at washington university? you might ask how anybody could have been so insensitive. after 18 years in the senate, it came naturally. [laughter]

george has been a close friend for nearly four decades and it is wonderful to welcome him to st. louis, even if the invitation so disgraceful. george will is one of the most recognizable people in america today. certainly, the most widely known intellectual. he is the author of the least a dozen books. since the early days of the show, he has been a regular on what is now "this week with george stephanopoulos." he is an astute philosopher. he is a native of illinois, a student of baseball, a lifelong cubs fan, and as such, he is a man of sorrows and acquainted with grief.

[laughter] despite their rudeness of the invitation, he is my friend. george well. [applause] >> jack's invitation is perfectly acceptable. my dear friend william f. buckley once called up his friend charleton heston, the actor, and said chuck, do you believe in free speech? he said, of course.

he said good, you are about to give one. it is a delight to be back here. it is a delight to be back on campus. long ago and far away, i was a college professor. in 1976, two of my friends ran for the senate against each other in new york state. the night they were both nominated, jim buckley got up and said, i look forward to running against professor moynihan. jim buckley is referring to you

as professor moynihan. pat said, the mudslinging has begun. what you are in for tonight, however, it is a lecture on political philosophy. take notes, there will be a test. in 1953, the year in which the words "under god" were added to the pledge of allegiance, it he proclaimed the fourth of july and national day of prayer. on that day, eisenhower fished

in the morning, golfed in the afternoon, and played bridge in the evening. there were prayers -- perhaps when the chief executive faced a daunting putt. this was not his first foray into the darkened ground of the relationship between religion and american politics. three days before christmas in 1952, president elect ike made a speech in which he said "our form of government has no sense unless it is founded in the deeply felt religious faith and i do not care what it is." he received a much ridicule from his cultured despise years. his professed indifference to the major of the religious faith.

it is the first part of the statement that deserves continuing attention. certainly many americans, perhaps the majority of them, agreed that democracy or at least our democracy, which is based on a belief in natural rights, presupposes religious faith. people believe this that all people are endowed by their creator with certain unalienable rights. there are two separate propositions that are pertinent to any consideration of the role of religion in american politics. one is an empirical question. is it a fact that the success of a democracy requires a religious people governing themselves by religious norms?

the second question is a question of logic. does belief in america as distinctive and democracy, a limited government whose limits are defined by the natural rights of the government, do those entail religious beliefs? regarding the empirical question, i believe religion can still be supremely important and helpful to the flourishing of our democracy. i do not believe it is necessary for good citizenship. regarding the question of our government's logic, i do not think the idea of natural rights requires a religious foundation or even that the founders uniformly thought so. it is, however, the case that natural rights are especially grounded when there are grounded in religious.

we in journalism are admonished not to bury the lead. we are supposed to put the most important point early on in our story. i will begin by postulating the following. in the 20th-century, the most important decision taken anywhere by anyone about anything was the decision made in the first decade of the last century about where to locate princeton university's graduate college. princeton's president, a starchy presbyterian named woodrow wilson, wanted the graduate college located on the main campus.

wilson's adversary won and the graduate college located where it now is -- wanted the graduate college located where it now is. woodrow wilson was a man of unbending temperament when he was certain he was right, which was almost always. he took his defeat about the graduate college badly. he resigned the presidency, went into politics. [laughter] i simplify somewhat and exaggerate a bit. i do so to make a point, however. to date and for the past century, since woodrow wilson was elected the nation's president 100 years ago,

american politics has been a struggle to determine which best understood what american politics should be. should we practice the politics of woodrow wilson? or the politics of james madison? what has this to do with our topic today, the role of something ancient, religion, in something very modern, american politics? the crux of the difference between the approaches to politics is the concept of natural rights. as i draw for you my picture of the rivalry, i recall the story of a teacher who asked her class to draw a picture of whatever here she chose. she circulated among their desks. pausing at the desk of little sally, she asked, of what are

you drawing a picture? i am drawing a picture of god. the teacher said, no one knows what god looks like. sally replied, they will in a minute. [laughter] in 30 minutes or so, you will have the picture or so of my theory of the role of religion in american politics. i will note three peculiarities. i write about politics to support my baseball habit. jack had the bad taste to mention the chicago cubs. i grew up midway between chicago and st. louis.

i had to choose between being a cubs fan and the cardinals fan. all of my friends became cardinal fans and grew up cheerful and liberal. [laughter] i became a gloomy conservative, but not gloomy about long-term prospects. america has just had a presidential election, its 57th. the ticket of one of the major parties did not contain a protestant. this was an event without precedent. it is especially interesting because the ticket, and morman

and a catholic, was put forward by a party -- regarding religion, the times, they are changing. when are they not? i am part of this interesting change. i am a member of the nones. when americans are asked their religious affiliation, 20% say none. my subject is the role of religion and politics. i am not a person of faith. concerning this, permit me a few digressions. i am the son of a professor of

philosophy. he was the son of a lutheran minister. my father may have become a philosopher because his father was a minister. as a boy, the future professor will sat outside the pastors study door listening to the pastor and members of his congregation wrestle with the problem of reconciling free will. by the time my father became an adult, after a childhood of two or more church services every sunday, he had seen quite enough of the inside of churches. he also had acquired a philosopher's disposition. i was raised in a secular home, but one which the table talk often took a reflective turn. my father had recently so

adjourned at oxford, i was able to spend two years there. oxford was the vibrant center of the study of philosophy. because of that, i next went to princeton to study political philosophy. i began in journalism at the national review. religion is central to the american party because religion is not central to american

politics. religion plays a large role in nurturing of the virtue because of the modernity of america. our nation assigns the politics, encouraging the flourishing of the infrastructure of the institution that have the primary responsibility for nurturing the sociology of virtue. these institutions with their primary responsibility are of the private sector of life. they are not political institutions.

some of our founders, notably benjamin franklin, subscribe to the 18th century, a creator that wound up the universe like a clock and did not intervene in the human story. deism explains the existence of the nature of universe, but so does the big bang theory. religion is supposed to consult and conjoin, as well as explain. deism hardly counts as a religion. george washington would not kneel to pray. when his pastor rebuked him for setting a bad example, washington mended his ways.

he stayed away from church on communion sundays. he of knowledge christianity's benign influence on society. no ministers were present and no prayers were said when he died. washington had proclaimed that religion and morality are indispensable supports for political prosperity. reason and experience both were best to expect that morality can prevail in exclusion for religious principles.

the longer john adams lived, the shorter grew his creed. in the end, it was unitarianism. jefferson wrote those ringing words of the declaration, but jefferson was a utilitarian when he urged his nephew to inquire into the truth of christianity. "if it ends in a belief that there is no god, you'll find virtue in the comforts and pleasantness you feel in virtue's exercise." james madison always explained away religion as an innate appetite. the mind, he said, prefers the idea of the self existing clause to an infinite series of

cause and effect. even the founders who were unbelievers considered it a civic duty in public service to be observant unbelievers. two days after jefferson wrote his famous letter endorsing a wall of separation between church and state, he attended church services in the house of representatives. services were also held at the treasury department. jefferson and other founders made statements like accommodations for the public's strong preference for religion

to enjoy ample space in the public square. they understood that christianity fostered attitudes and aptitudes associated with useful to a popular government. protestantism emphasis on the individuals' direct relationship with god and the privacy of individual choice subverted convention hierarchical societies in which deference was expected from the many towards the few. beyond that, the american founding owes much more to john locke than to jesus. the founders created a distinctly modern regime, one

respectful of pre-existing rights. rights that exist before government exists. rights that are natural and are not creations of the regime that exists to secure them. in 1786, the year before the constitution convention, it in the preamble for religious freedom, jefferson proclaimed "our civil rights have no dependence on our religious opinions any more than our opinions and physics or geometry." since the founding, america's religious enthusiasm have waxed and waned. the durability of america's denominations have confounded jefferson's prediction, which he made in 1822. he said there is not a young man now living in the united states who will not die a unitarian.

the public elected taft. the presidential nominee said his opponent for president, taft, was unfit to be president because being a unitarian, he did not believe in the virgin birth. the public yawned and elected taft. there is a paradox at work. america is the first and most relentlessly modern nation. to the consternation of the social scientists,it is also the most religious modern nation. one important reason for this is that we have disentangled religion from public institutions. there has long been a commonplace assumption, one that my dear friend called the

liberal expectancy. it was, and still is, an assumption that pre-modern pre-modern forces will lose their saliency. the two most important of these allegedly pre market forces are religion and ethnicity. of course, every day and every region, offense refute the liberal expectancy. religion entangled with reinforcing ethnicity still derives history. religion is also central to the emergence of america's public philosophy. at the risk of offending specialists by distortion through compression, what we

offer a very brief placement of americans foundries. machiavelli begins modern political philosophy. this spot is a convenient demarcation. the ancients sought to enlarge the likelihood of the emergence of noble leaders. machiavelli, however, took his bearings from people as they are. he defined the political project as making the best of this flawed material. he knew that nothing would ever be made from the crooked timber of humanity.

machiavelli was no democrat. he reoriented politics towards accommodations, strong and predictable forces rising from a great constant, human nature common to all people in all stations. for 44 years, machiavelli and luther were contemporaries. luther was no democrat. in theory, and least of all in temperament. when summoned, he proclaimed, here i stand.

i cannot do otherwise. he asserted the privacy of the individual and the individual's conscience. this expressed the logic of his political radicalism. without fully intending to do so, he celebrated individualism at the expense of tradition and of hierarchy. he sought a ground of certainty, beyond revelation and beyond -- a epistemology, the

philosophy of knowledge. descartes played a role. descartes sought a ground of certainty, beyond a revelation and beyond pure abstract reason. he famously found such a ground in cognition itself. i think, therefore, i am. it was supplied the foundations for whatever certainties human beings can achieve. it was then hobbe's philosophy that became the decisive. the bedrock of certainty came from his experience with religious warfare. this strife taught him that all

human beings have one shared constant similarity. they all fear death. he directed a philosophy of despotism. in exchange for security, people would willingly surrender the precious sovereignty they possessed in the state of nature where life was solitary, brutish, and short. his philosophy, contained the seeds of democracy. all human beings were equally under the sway of the narrative. all human beings can come up without the assistance of a

priest, comprehend the basic passions that move the world. to the extent that the world of politics is driven by strong and steady passions and interests, to that extent, there will be a new science of politics. the science of politics based on what all human beings have in common, acknowledged supplied by the senses. because people do not agree about religious truths, and because they fight over their disagreements, social tranquility is served by regarding religion as voluntary matter for private judgment. not state-supported and state

enforced. in the interest of social peace, the higher aspirations of the ancient political philosophers were pushed to the margins of modern politics. those aspirations were considered, at best, unrealistic. at worst, downright dangerous. henceforth, politics would not be a sphere in which human nature is perfected. political project would not include appointing people towards their highest potentials. instead, a modern politics would be based on the assumption that people will express and will act upon the strong impulses of their flawed nature's. the ancients had asked, what is

the highest of which mankind is capable? how can we pursue this in politics? hobbes asked, what is the worst that can happen in politics? and how can we avoid this? america's founders had a kind of political catechism that expressed modernity. what is the worst political outcome? tyranny. what a form of tyranny can happen any republic governed by majority rule? tyranny of the majority. how could this be prevented? the answer is by not having majorities that can become tyrannical. reducing the likelihood the

stable and tyrannical majority can emerge and endure. how was this to be achieved? by implementing james madison's revolution of democratic theory. of the diminutive madison, he was about 5 foot 3. never have there been such a high ratio of mind to mass. he was princeton's first graduate student and he turned democratic theory upside-down. before madison, few political theorists believe democracy could be feasible only in a small face to face society. this was supposedly so because factions were considered the

enemy of popular government small societies were thought to be least susceptible to the proliferation of factions. madison's revolutionary theory, the core of which is distilled in federalist paper number 10, was that a republic should be small but extensive, expand the scope of the republic in order to expand the number of factions. the more factions, the merrier. saving multiplicity of factions will make it more probable that majorities will be unstable, shifting minority factions. madison related his clear-eyed and unsentimental view to the constitution's structure.

in federalist 51, he said -- ambition must be made to counteract ambition. >> that is the self- interestedness of rival institutions, presidents, legislatures will check one another. madison famously continued, it may be a reflection on human nature that such device should be necessary to control the abuses of government but what is government itself but the greatest of all reflections on human nature. if men were angels no government would be necessary. if angels were to govern men, night external or internal controls on government would be necessary. so said madison, we must have a policy of supplying by opposite and rival interest that defect better motives.

but neither madison nor the other founding father's should predispose without there being good motives somewhere. such motives are manifestations of good character. our founders were not so foolish as to suppose that freedom can thrive or survive without appropriate education and nourishments of character. they understood this must mean education broadly understood to include not just schools, but all the institutions of civil society that explain freedom and equip citizens with the virtues freedom requires. these virtues includes self- control, modernization. these reinforce the rationality

essential to human happiness. notice when madison like the founding father's generally spoke of human nature, he was not speaking as modern progressives do as manage inconstant, something evolving, something constantly formed and reformedly changing social and other historical forces. when people today speak of nature, they generally speak of flora and trees and animals and other things not human. but the founders spoke of nature as a guide to and as a measure of human action. they thought of nature not as something merely to be manipulated for human convenience but rather as a source of norms to be

discovered. they understood that natural rights could not be asserted, celebrated and defended unless nature, including human nature is regarded as a normative rather than a merely con ting nt fact. -- contingent fact. is not chaos but rather as the replace of employment of chaos in the mind and will of the creator. this is the creator who endows us with natural right that is are inevitable, inalienable and universal and hence the foundation of democratic quality. and these natural rights are the foundation of limited government. government defined by the limited goal of securing those rights so that individuals may

flourish in their free and responsible exercise of those rights. a government thus limited is not in the business of imposing its opinions about what happiness or what excellence the citizens should choose to pursue. having such opinions is the business of other institutions, private and voluntary institutions, especially religious ones that supply the conditions of liberty. thus the founders did not consider natural rights reasonable because religion affirmed them, rather the founders considered religion reasonable because it secured natural rights. there may, however, be a cultural contradiction. the contradiction is while

religion can sustain liberty, liberty does not necessarily sustain religion. this is of paramount importance because of the importance of the declaration of independence. america's public philosophy is instilled in the declaration's second paragraph. we hold these truths to be self- evident. notice our nation was born with an assertion the important political truths are not merely knowable, they are self- evident, meaning they can be known by any mind, not clouded by ignorance or superstition it is the declaration self-evident true that all men are created equal, equal not only in their access to the important political truths, but also in being endowed by their creator with certain inalienable rights

including life liberty and the pursuit of happiness. next comes perhaps the most important word in the declaration. it is the word secure. to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, jefferson wrote. primarygovernment's purpose is to secure preexisting rights. government does not create rights, it does not dispense them. here, concerning the opening paragraphs of the declaration is where wilson and modern progressivism enter the american story. wilson urged people not to read what he called the preface to the declaration. he explicitly said if you wish to understand the real declaration of independence, do not read the preface. that is what everyone else calls the essence of the

declaration of independence. wilson did so for the same reason he became the first president to criticize the american founding. and he did not criticize it about minor matters. he criticized it root and branch beginning with the doctrine of natural right which is he rejected. his criticism began there precisely because that doctrine dictates a limited government which he considered a cramped unscientific understanding of political seasons. wilson disparaged the doctrine of natural rights as quote fourth of july sentiments." he did so because this doctrine limited the plan to make government more scientific in the service of a politics that is much for ambitious.

wilson's formative years were the years in which darwin's theory of evolution seeped into the social science, including political science. wilson the first president of the american political science association wanted the political project to make government evolve as human nature evolves. only by doing so he thought could government help human nature progress. this is why for progressives progress meant progressing up from the founders and they are falls because static understanding of human nature. only government unleashed from the confining doctrine of natural rights could be muscular enough for this project. such a government needed not

the founder's static constitution but a living constitution. a much more permissive constitution, that is the new progressive government needed the old constitution to be construed as granting to the government, powers sufficient for whatever projects the government decided or required for progress. what then about the framer's purpose of writing a constitution to protect people from popular passions. wilson argued that the evolution of society had advanced so far that such worries were acknist i can. -- anachronistic. the passions in society such as the united states had wilson believed been domesticated. they no longer threatened to be

tyrannical or threatened the social order. hence wilson thought the state emancipated from the founders static constitution should be and i quote him an instrumentality for quickening in every way both collective and individual development. well, who was to determine what ways might not be suitable. the answer must be the government itself. wilson was as progressives tended to be a his or the cyst, -- historicist, that is someone with a strong sense of theology, history he -- teleology, history thought had its own unfolding logic, it's autonomous trajectory, it's proper

destination. it was the duty of leaders to discern the destination towards which history was progressing and to make government the unfettered better of this progress. progressives tend to exalt the role of farsighted leaders and hence to exalt the role of the american president. this too puts them at odds with the founders. the words leader and leaders appear just 13 times in all of the federalist papers, once as a reference to those who led the revolution. the other dozen times are all in context of disparagement. the founders were wary of the people's potential for unrational and unruly passions and were therefore wear of leaders who would seek to ascend to power by arousing ways of such passions. wilson however was unworried about what worried the founders.

he said great passions when they run through a whole population inevitably find a great spokesman. in 1912 they found wilson. and he began building what we have today, the modern administrative regulatory state from the supervision of which no corner of life is immune. now, i will leave it to other more theologically grounded persons to decide whether or how the progressive doctrine of a changing human nature can be squared with the teachings of various religions. i will, however, postulate. this a nation such as ours steeped in and shaped by biblical religion cannot accommodate a politics that takes it's bearings from the proposition that human nature is a product of malleable

forces and perhaps under perfection is a purpose of politics. i will go further, biblical religion is concerned with asserting and defending the dignity of the individual. biblical religion teach that is individual dignity is linked to individual responsibility and moral agency, therefore, biblical religion surely should be wear of the consequences of government unat the timered from the limited purpose of securing natural rights. do not take my word for it. take the word of alexis. he wrote democracy in america two generations after the american founding. two generations after madison

identified tyranny of the majority as the distinctively worst political outcome that democracy could produce. he had a different answer than madison did to the question of what kind of despotism democratic nations have to fear. his warning is justly famous and more pertinent now than ever. this despotism that worried him would be milder than traditional despotism would degrade men without tormenting them. it is absolute, detailed, regular, far seen and mild. it would resemble paternal power if like tatted for its object to prepare men for manhood, button contrary it

seeks only to keep them fixed irrevocably in childhood. it rarely works for their happiness but wants to be the sole ash or the for their -- sole arbiter for that happiness. it provides for their security, foresees and secures their needs, facilitates their pleasures, conducts their principle affairs, directs their industry, regulates their estates, divides their inheritances, can it not take away from them entirely the trouble of thinking and the pain of living? so it is he continued that every day it renders the employment of free will less useful and more rare. it confines the action of the will in a smaller space and little by little steals the very use of free will from each

citizen. it reduces each nation to being nothing more than a herd of timid and industrious animals of which the government is the shepherd. each of us can, each of us must really decide to what extent this has been full filled. people of faith might ask this, does the tendency of modern politics to take on more and more tasks in order to e little rate the human conditions, does this tend to mute religion's message about reconciling us to that condition. and people worry where religious institutions can flourish beneath the dark shade of the government that tries to splay every human need and satisfy every human appetite.

to the extent that the politics of modernity attenuates the religion of society, to the extent it threatens society's prosperity and happiness. he understood this. erving described himself as thee tropic by which he meant oriented to 00 theotrioucm,-- ty which he meant oriented to the divine. he explained why in he has words which a society needs more than sensible men and women if it is to prosper. it need the energizes of the creative imagination as expressed in the arts. it is crucial to the lives of all of our citizens as it is to all human beings at all times that they encounter a world that possesses a transcendent

meaning in which the human experience makes sense. nothing is more dehumanizing, more certain to generate a crisis than to experience one's life as a meaningless event in a meaningless world. we may be approaching what is for our nation unexplored and unperilous territory. europe is experiencing that and the results are not attractive. it seems that when a majority of people internalize the big bang theory and ask with peggy lee is that all there is, when many people decide the universe is the result of a cosmic sneeze with no meaning, when they conclude that therefore life should be filled, overflowing with distractions, comforts and entertainments to

assuage the board m, then they may become susceptible to the excitements of politics that promise assets -- ersatz meaning and spurs alleviations of a human condition berefts and therefore barren. we know from bitter experience of blood soaked 20th century the political consequences of this if it's meaninglessness. political nature of who are vacuum and a vacuum of meaning is filled by secular fighting faiths. fascism gave its adherence a meaningful life. communism taught it's adherence to derive meaning from the participation in the drama of history's unfolding destiny. the political paradox is this,

secularism advanced in part as moral revolution against the history of religious strife. but there is no precedence for bloodshed in the scale produced in the 20th century by political faiths. therefore even those of us who are members of the growing cohort that pugh calls nuns, we -- pew calls "nones," wish continued vigor for the rich array of religious institution that is have leavened american life. we do so for reasons articulated by the most articulated american statesman. in 1859 beneath the clouds of war and disunion a successful railroad lawyer from across the river from less than 100 miles north of here, a lawyer turned

presidential addressed a wisconsin agricultural society. he concluded his speech with and farme that devised a proposition to be carved in stone, to be forever in view and forever true. after some weeks they returned and the proposition they offered to him was this too shall pass away. said abraham lincoln, how consoling that proposition is in times of grief, how chastening in times of pride and yet said lincoln it is not necessarily true. if he said, we americans cultivate the world within us as we cultivate the physical world around us, we perhaps

shall long endure. we have long endured. we shall continue to the. this is so in large measure because of america's whole some division of labor between political institution and the intermediary institutions of civil society. including especially religious institutions that mediate between the citizen and the state. the mediating institutions crucial to the flourishing of st. louis include this university, this center and crucial to the dan forget family. -- danfortgth family. thank you and thank them for you're attention and now i welcome your comments. i thank you very much. >> we are having time for q&a. we have standing mikes if you

will queue at the mikes we will take your turn and we will end promptly at 8:30 which gives us about 20 minutes. >> i appear to have answered every question. >> thanks for coming. what would you see -- one of the arguments for less government involvement with things is that if people hold on to their money more, they would be in a position to take care of the poor, the oh pressed etc. can you imagine where else that might come from? do you think it's possible for those people to be taken care of outside of a religious context and outside of a political context and are there any examples of that in other

government? >> i am not denying the role which americans of all political persuasions now agree on that the state has in applying a social safety net. i am saying there are potential cost to this and not only financial cost. there is a cost of a crowding out of private initiative, a crowding out of charity. an off loading of all social responsibilities on to the state. it is indicative surely of something important that the chartable impulse in the united states is far stronger than it is in europe. and the welfare states are far stronger in europe than they are in the united states. the united states has been tardy some people say backward, i say prudent in not off loading so much of social responsibility on to the state.

that's all i'm saying. that there is a cost beyond the financial cost of the entitlement state that ought to be thought about, particularly because right now this becomes extremely practical as we scramble around looking for revenues to fund the entitlement state. people say one way to get more revenues is to limit chartable deductions so the state grows and at the same time simultaneously and because of that limits the chartable efficacy of the charitable impulse. >> do you think outside of religious organizations or the government, do you think something else would fill that vacuum? >> lots of things. the democracy in america, still the greatest book written. he wrote it when we were just

becoming a mass democracy and nothing struck him more than the american society in generating spontaneous order of voluntary associations. it's no other country is like this. when the wagon trades would leave -- a great american attorney who was librarian of congress. he wrote about the second day out they circumstance it would wagons and write a constitution for the wagon train and assign tasks and have committees. it's in our national d.n.a., partly because we believe in govern answer from the bottom up. >> thank you so much. this was a wonderful lecture. i only hope that conservatism

has more defenders in the coming decade. i have a couple of questions. one kind of piggy backs. you said at the beginning of your these sis that religion is in the place of civil society where we discuss and define our moral values, religion should be separated from politics, continuing on what is the danger of having government and politics continually encroach upon a civil society that is supposed to be separate from that? and separate from that i really enjoyed everything you said. my question regarding the logic of your argument is how do you have this idea that biblical religion supports human rights with the fact that christianity and the bible has changed dramatically over the last 2,000 years?

>> i would argue that the essence of christianity has not changed over the last 2,000 years. it is been used for political purposes and people tend to piggy back their political agendas on to all kind of mankind inheritance. but biblical religion is a constant of human nature. i do not think and certainly did not intend to say that a belief in natural rights needs to be grounded in religion. jefferson believes our rights don't depend on our religious beliefs. i do believe it is the case that religious people are grounded in the right are natural because nature was designed by a creator have a particularly strong foundation for a belief in our rights.

>> thank you so much for being here. it's an honor. did you ever consider running for political office, what were the determining factors and would you ever consider it in the future? >> no to the first question. i live in maryland. there are only three republicans in maryland. and second public life would cut into my baseball too much. third, i have a metabolic urge to write. i can't stop and so that would interfere. >> please don't. keep it up. >> thank you very much. >> i'm curious. i know in a lot of your comments you date the modern expansion of government going back to wilson. i'm curious could this be [indiscernible]

extended more to lincoln? he was very critical of the expansion of federal government powers -- going beyond the strict government constitution goes back to him? lincoln expanded executive power more than anybody ever envisioned. he did so exclusively under the war powers of the constitution. the emancipation proclamation was explicitly [indiscernible] in the war powers. i have offended someone. lincoln said when he suspended habeas corpus, he did so when

congress was out of session. when -- as soon as congress returned, he sought permission. all power to jefferson who had the audacity to embed a doctrine of natural rights. all of my political sentiments, all of my political sentiment derived from the declaration. there is no sense in which woodrow wilson, although he did expand executive powers in peacetime, there is no sense in which he is in lincoln's position.

>> thank you. >> thank you for your excellent lecture. towards the end of your lecture, you mentioned that in the 20th century, secular and political faiths have killed more people than religious faiths. i can only assume you were talking about soviet russia and nazi germany. were these regimes possible because of the uniformity? if that is the case, how did the myriad number of protestant denominations in the united states provide a unique defense against tyranny? >> i would not say -- i was not referring to just the soviet

union and nazi germany. communist china killed far more of those two tyrannies combined, with no christian heritage to speak of. there are serious scholars that makes serious arguments that there is something and luther's temperament that was germanic. he was no democrat. the more, the merrier. religious factions or alternative sources of social authority. what you want is a society in

which the state does not monopolized social authority. >> you talked extensively about religion in the united states contributing to [inaudible] there is one particular force that think they can inflict their views on this country. they insist said it was the intention of the founding fathers to create a christian equivalent of iran, which i do not think is the case. just because you are religious, it does not make you write all the time. >> get in line with everybody

else. with respect, i disagree with what you just said. the religious right, which i obviously am not a member, rose after the religious left in the form of the reverend martin luther king and jesse jackson, etc., etc. the religious right was provoked into politics. the tradition among many protestants was political quietism. and then the supreme court decided that the constitution required that there be at exclusion of religion from the public square in the removal of prayer from schools. deeply offended a great many

americans. 40 years ago, next month, they delivered the final provocation for the legitimate political purpose of trying to save the culture. i know a great many people work them up into a frenzy about the threats of theocracy. you use the comparison of iran. good lord. we are so far from any possible menace of religious orthodoxy. try to have a prayer at a high- school football game in texas.

there is zero grounds. i do not see it. nor do i think in the members of the religious right, and i know many of them, any desire to tyrannize. they went into politics because they felt they were attacked. they want to be left alone. [applause] >> i appreciate you as a voice of reason. [inaudible] my question is more about historical and interpretation. what do think it keeps us so

deeply in our ongoing philosophy of what democracy should be? >> that is a separate question. there are two in my ignorance. the continental french -- enlightenments. the continental french enlightenment.

they differ radically. the british enlightenment was empirical and temperate. the french enlightenment was severe. one gave rise to be glorious revolution and eventually the american revolution. the french enlightenment gave rise to the french revolution and a blood bath. this sounds like a philosophy seminar. what do we know and how do we know it? the french are great believers in deductive reasoning. the british, in the tradition of skepticism which make sure tentative about the fallibility. did build a temperance which

nobody ever accused the french of. >> thank you for your lecture. me and my husband moved to germany. when i considered entering into adulthood, how can i contribute to society? it is very difficult to give any sort of charity for any charitable purposes in europe. it is very difficult to give service in europe. when i was asking people, they said, why would we serve? there is a bureau for that. there are some places in europe burk it is illegal to give volunteer service. as i see the united states going in the same trend of outsourcing, it is so overregulated and so over

controlling of your life, it takes away your freedom to even support yourself, how would you propose the government relinquished power is that it has taken over peacefully? how do you think the government would be able to let go of this control of our lives? >> i agree with every syllable you just said. [laughter] badyou almost provoked me to be more political than i felt comfortable doing in this chapel. leave more space, more breathing room for civil society. this astonishing combustion of voluntary association.

in my remarks, i used the analogy of a tree. in the shade of which, smaller things cannot grow. that is the danger of an excess of state. >> [inaudible] how can we get them to take the laws out? >> win some elections. [applause] >> we are almost out of time. >> you were raised in a secular household. and how you still classify

yourself as not being religious. he still believed to be the correct position. you also mentioned the benefits of religion. this interesting paradox where if everybody held the position you do, we would lose the benefits of religion. how do you reconcile that? >> you are right. it is an empirical question. not a question of logic. it is an empirical question. society can be prosperous and virtuous and freed without religious sustenance. the biggest laboratory for that is post-christian europe. it is not promising.

it is a fair question. the logic of my argument is there are a lot more people like me, we would be in big trouble. i think that may be true. >> thank you. >> what are your views on the present state and the future state of the american nuclear family? >> without any doubt, america's biggest problem is not the debt. the fiscal cliff and other metaphorical geology. the biggest problem in america is family disintegration. family is the primary

transmitter of social capital. [applause] 1964, lyndon johnson's labor department, produced a report. there is a crisis in the negro family today because 24% of african-americans children are being born to unmarried parents. 24% in 1964. today, one-third of all american children are born to unmarried mothers. we know what this means. we know the social pathology. we know what that means in terms of neighborhoods and schools.

we have no idea what happened. we do not know why in 1950, the out-of-wedlock birth rate was 5%. we have seen family disintegration during war, famine, and pestilence. it has happened in wales, portugal, spain, all over. we do not know why. we do not know what to do about it. i will give an answer that will interest and amuse the previous questioner. when two things coincided in late 18th-century england, a grain surplus, the result was a

cheap gin and a social calamity. they passed a few laws, licensing laws, it did not help. what turned britain around was john wesley. methodism. converting the women of england -- [laughter] that is the way it worked. it is an odd thing for me to be saying. >> you talked about the virtues freedom requires. i worked in the field of education. if our major problem children come to school without virtues, it is the public school system the place to nurture that?

i believe our society and culture does not nurture those virtues. how do we address that? >> this is a good question. the family is the smallest school. by the time all lots of negligently parented, often at no-fault to the single mother, these children get to school, and it is too late. the chicago schoolteacher it says should its first graders who do not know numbers, shapes, or colors. they're raised in a culture of